The agricultural enterprise ordinance could be Theodora Stephen’s ticket to creating farm stays on her small olive oil operation in Santa Ynez.
“Rents are now completely out of control for business establishments, and we need to diversify our revenues,” Stephen wrote in a public comment letter to the Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors ahead of its Nov. 5 meeting, during which the supervisors discussed the ordinance.
Stephen planted 2,000 olive trees in 1995, making her the first extra virgin olive oil producer in the county. Her small farm, Global Gardens, now makes more than 50 food products.
“Yearning to complete my vision of creating a wellness center where people can come learn about food as medicine with olive oil as the center point, I am in escrow on an Ag-I-20 lot on Alamo Pintado Rd.,” Stephen said in the letter. “In my budget projections for year two, I am hoping for the approval of three tiny homes (less than 120 square feet each) to create farm stays, extending the learning of the sustainability of living on a small farm.”
Farm stays are one of many new pathways created in the agricultural enterprise ordinance—which would allow agricultural land owners in the unincorporated parts of Santa Barbara County to use their land for more than agricultural activity or add to its productivity.
The concept first came up in November 2020, and it’s now gone through a rigorous planning and development process—including eight Planning Commission hearings—to iron out the details before it went before the Board of Supervisors, which has the final say.
Other jurisdictions in California, including San Luis Obispo and Santa Cruz counties, have created camping ordinances to allow for camping on ag land, and Yolo County has defined agritourism and various uses requiring permits. But Santa Barbara County would be the first in the state to create “a whole suite of activities in one fell swoop,” Long Range Planning Deputy Director Alex Tuttle told the Sun.
“Trying to find a solution that addresses everyone’s interest and concerns I think has been challenging and certainly taken a lot more time than we probably anticipated,” Tuttle said, “but hopefully the end result will be something everyone gets widespread buy-in and something everyone can appreciate and support.”
If the board approves the ordinance, it could open the doors for operators to add some on-site food processing, farm stands, special events, camping, trails, and farm stays to their operations.
“This is integral to my paying for the land, which in our region has become out of reach for us small farmers,” olive oil producer Stephen said. “Especially here in Santa Ynez, where prices are so high—and the weather near perfect for such a concept—I beg the supervisors to pass this ordinance immediately and not politicize the situation any longer.”
But supervisors weren’t quite ready to take that leap.
After a nine-hour meeting—and a nearly two-hour discussion on the agricultural enterprise ordinance alone—supervisors tabled a decision until Dec. 10 to work out additional details around camping and farm stays and add an enforcement element to protect the county from bad actors who don’t comply with the rules.
“A project like this and effort like this takes a village,” Tuttle said. “I think the eight meetings at the Planning Commission … show that it takes a lot of work hearing from different perspectives. I think one thing we’ve learned from this process is that the ag community is not a unified singular voice; there’s a lot of different perspectives and visions.”
A group of nearly 40 farmers, ranchers, and other community members signed a public comment letter that highlighted the “concerns and unintended consequences of the agricultural enterprise ordinance as it currently stands.”
“As written, the AEO [agricultural enterprise ordinance] paves the way for the rapid conversion of large swaths of agricultural land to developed, hospitality operations. This is not exaggeration,” the letter stated. “This is what happens when developers—as well as farmers, ranchers, and others who own Ag-II land and have development dreams for that land—have the ear of lawmakers and create a false sense of urgency to push through complex legislation that includes ambiguous terms and lacks adequate enforcement mechanisms.”
Third District Supervisor Joan Hartmann wanted more assurance that operators will comply with the ordinance’s standards, put agriculture first, and act in good faith.
“I also think we’re making a big step here and we’re having trust and faith, and I think it’s really important if people are doing this without permits or in defiance of their permit conditions, I would like to see something built in the ordinance where they would not be entitled to do this for a period of time or a year or so,” Hartmann said. “We don’t have penalties that amount to much; we need some other strategy to say we are serious.”
Neighboring SLO County’s planning department created an incidental camping ordinance that allows for small-scale and temporary/seasonal camping “that is secondary to the primary use of the land.” It requires people to go through various permitting processes depending on the number of camping units on the site, a minimum parcel size, and a general four-prong test: remoteness, access roads, slope, and emergency response times.
“Based on our conversations with them, a lot of property owners are doing [this] without obtaining permits, like camping or Hipcamps,” Tuttle said. “Enforcement and compliance have been a challenge.”
Hipcamp, an app that connects rural landowners with campers, showed 364 places to stay in SLO County. According to previous reporting from New Times, the Sun’s sister paper, SLO County lagged behind in developing clear rules as more Hipcamp sites popped up following the COVID-19 pandemic.
In Santa Barbara County, Hipcamp showed more than 370 places to stay, and the company wrote a public comment letter supporting the new ordinance.
To ensure that all activities, including camping, following the ordinance’s rules, the Planning and Development Department is creating a stronger enforcement mechanism that will be a part of the package that returns to the supervisors in December.
“The conversation was: Is there a way to track those and know where these activities are occurring in a manner that is not overly burdensome to property owners?” Tuttle said.
The planning department is still discussing what the additional enforcement tools would look like, and Tuttle didn’t have too many details to share just yet.
“Our job on the planning side is to do some review and research, reach a recommendation or determination as to options, and come back to them with that information, and they can make a decision,” Tuttle said. “I think you heard from the board there’s general support from the board, there’s general support for the project, and it’s just a matter of dialing a few of the specifics.
“But I think it was a pretty positive meeting, and I expect a good outcome come December.”
Reach Staff Writer Taylor O’Connor at toconnor@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in Nov 14-24, 2024.